I took GEG’s short-ish answer to peak oil as an indication that he’d not yet studied it deeply rather than someone who’d given it a period of solid inquiry and then dismissed it. They are two entirely different positions.
While I am thoroughly unfamiliar with GEG’s work outside of the fields of banking and the Federal Reserve, I will note that almost everything he described about the purpose and role of bailouts in the past has come to pass in this crisis. I am too, reminded here that Linus Pauling, three time Nobel Laureate and chemistry genius, is now chided for his strong advocacy for Vitamin C later in life. What I’m implying is that sometimes a person’s advocacy for something can diminish the appeal of their other work, and sometimes not. The number of intelligent people that have been lured by the potential of vitamins is extraordinarily high and so I tend to give something of a pass on that field. It’s not the same thing as advocacy of something that displays a defect in critical thinking or a lack of basic morality which can impact my assessment of someone.
My approach, then, is to take what I will of someone’s work and leave the rest. As long as someone has a solid body of work and a proven track record in one area, it’s rare that I will completely toss the baby with the bathwater.
In this instance, I believe everybody has something to learn from GEG’s Jekyll Island work, especially as it pertains to the structure and functioning of the banking system and the rationale and mechanisms that lie behind the privatization of profits but the socialization of risks, otherwise known as “bailouts.”
I certainly did.
The above highlighted statement is probably the greatest shortcoming of many, many members of this forum! So many smart people that have closed their minds to facts, because of their belief structure/system.
I still would have liked GEG to expand on his answers. But as you stated doc, he’s been a crystal ball to the future for many years.
Vitamins
I immediately thought of Pauling too. The recent documentary “food matters” goes into this area and makes some intelligent inquiry into nutrition, vitamins and modern health / pharmacy.
LR, Please cease and desist with this passive aggressive attack. I blew it off the last 20 times you made this statement, but I guess your going to keep writing it until someone responds to it. Here is my response:
Do I imply that you’re an idiot for accepting as fact that which I perceive as marketing and/or hearsay? No, I do not, because I regocnize that it is a matter of personal judgement. Believe what you want to believe, I don’t care. I was just stating my opinion. Why do you seem to care what I believe?
This discussion is a perfect example of how the use of conspiracy goggles not only distorts the truth, but in fact proves to be personally harmful. In his book World Without Cancer: The Story of Vitamin B17, GEG reports on the theory that cancer is the result of a nutritional deficiency, specifically a lack of a certain compound called Amygdalin, which is erroneously referred to a vitamin by the proponents of this theory.
GEG spends much of the book “exposing” vast conspiracies of the drug companies to publicly dismiss the value of this compound for a myriad of self-serving reasons. The reader is left to infer a value to Vitamin B-17 based not on scientific analysis, but primarily on the conspiracy argument put forth by GEG in the book. Yet, here are the facts regarding amygdalin:
- No controlled, double-blind study has ever shown that Vitamin B-17 has any effect on cancerous tumor growth.
- The metabolism of Vitamin B-17 produces hydrogen cyanide, a deadly toxin.
The Discovery of Noah’s Ark,
Written and narrated by G. Edward Griffin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVCvzGr7h1g
Well at least he’s not talking about aliens, oops!
Is there a Black-Ops cabal, even more powerful than government, using technology from alien civilizations?
Introduction by G. Edward Griffin – Updated 2010 February 2
http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/freedomcontent.cfm?fuseaction=disclosure&refpage=issues
It doesn’t really matter how much gold is left in the ground. There is always enough gold at the right price. Once people break out of the paradigm that gold has a fixed price they will soon see freegold. The price of gold will float to whatever it takes to back the dollar.
For more on the subject read…
[quote=dtm]
“there is plenty of gold in the world, most of it is not yet mined”
Yeah right… http://europe.theoildrum.com/node/5989
| Figure 20: Australia cumulative gold production & modelling for an ultimate of 17 kt. |
Figure 21: Australia annual gold production & modelling for an ultimate of 17 kt.
|
| Figure 16: Canada cumulative gold production & modelling for an ultimate of 12 kt |
Figure 17: Canada annual gold production and modelling for an ultimate of 12 kt
|
| Figure 11: US cumulative gold production and modelling for an ultimate of 20 kt. |
Figure 12: US annual gold production for an ultimate of 20 kt.
|
| Figure 4: South Africa cumulative gold production & modelling. |
Figure 5: South Africa annual gold production & modelling.
|
I do not understand your point, DTM. If gold extraction rates are peaking at roughly the same time as everything else, then from its use as a currency perspective, that’s perfect. We want stable a currency/goods&services ratio so as to preserve purchasing power and avoid inflation, remember?
I’d like to say this is way over the top. Unfortunately, I can’t. Thanks for posting it.
Travlin
JAG,
You know it has nothing to do with being an idiot. It’s a matter of dissecting information as it comes. Just because I don’t agree with GEG’s Vit B17 argument doesn’t mean that I’m going to throw everything that he says out to pasture. IMO, that’s a very closed minded attitude. You obviously don’t see it that way. I do.
It would be like me taking your attitude/belief toward Gold/Silver, and making a judgement that you’re an idiot. Then not reading anything else you write because of that specific belief! IMO, that would be dumb of me!
And it’s all just opinion until there’s written/spoken/video evidence to prove otherwise. The shortcoming that I see most from many members here, is that they don’t even take solid evidence as a form of proof, because of their belief system.
Peace.
The issue lies in the fact that your definition of solid evidence is very different from those “many members” you so often chagrin.
Peace back at ya.
We want stable a currency/goods&services ratio so as to preserve purchasing power
If the quantity of gold is stable… but the flow of consumable resources is likely to diminish… gold will not preserve purchasing power… it will buy ever less oil, ever less silver… ever less tuna, ever less phosphate rock…
but (perhaps) the same amount of land…
Silver or copper on the other hand… may well match the depletion rate… or exceed it.
Is there a better proxy for oil ? Something with a better correlation for oil’s stock / flow time profile ?
http://www.financialsensearchive.com/fsu/editorials/stangelo/2009/1111.html
Tod -
Your quoted statement is absolutely 100% airtight correct. I hope you realize that it is a knife that cuts both ways.
Your belief system is what determines what solid evidence is for you and you alone. Sharing that belief system only makes you comfortable, it doesn’t necerssarily make it right.
Nice to see you back posting.
Ok, I will bite. Can you give some examples of things backed by solid evidence that have been rejected?
Since all the gold that’s ever been mined is still available, I suppose you’re right - point taken. However, DTM is still wrong. His implication is that since/if peak gold has come, it cannot function as a currency. The truth is since most other things have also peaked or are close to peaking, gold’s peak wouldn’t make its function as a currency any less feasible.
Not that it really matters anyway, since this is DTM I am trying to argue with after all. I may as well take my collection of atoms and entropize elsewhere, while they still behave in some form of a collective consciousness.
My point was that not only does he “not get” Peak Oil… he doesn’t understand or seem to know about the concept of peaking. Is he an economist by any chance…??
Can you point to exactly where I said that…? I think you’re assuming a lot…
Seriously? OMG. Personally, I don’t have the time to go through every “fact” that some members here will never see as fact, no matter how much evidence is brought forth. This applies to the site itself as well. So, if you’d like to do a search on the site for much of what’s in the CT dungeon, be my guest. But I’ll leave you with this…
Take a look at this thread, in which DrKrbyLuv is told to no longer discuss the international banking cartel as such, but now we have GEG bringing the exact same issues on the front page of the site. Hmmmm. So what’s truth and what’s not? It can change so damn fast, obviously. So, what you may think of as “theory” today, could change to fact, very quickly. But to discount it because of a belief system is IMO, wrong.
<a 0=“href=/comment/87914#comment-87914"” rel=“nofollow”>https://peakprosperity.com/comment/87914#comment-87914
<a 0=“href=/comment/88041#comment-88041"” rel=“nofollow”>https://peakprosperity.com/comment/88041#comment-88041
And DIAP, sorry but, I was where you’re at now, a long time ago (I know, you don’t agree…and that’s fine). I was able to break free. And IMO, I was much deeper into it that you ever were. The truth is the truth, no matter who writes it.
We’re now way off topic and I’d rather not get this thrown into the dungeon. Doc said pretty much the same as I did, but he obviously owns the site. I don’t see anyone attacking his thoughts/opinions/statement…I wonder why.
Gentleman,
we are all blinded to some degree by our belief systems.
The trick is to be willing to challenge as objectively as possible our thinking by absorbing and analyzing information that is contrary to the way we want to see the world.
Over the past year and a half, my belief systems have been challenged regarding the three branches of government, the political system, the banking industry, the malaise and fall of the economy, peak resources, etc.
That is one of the reasons I follow this site and appreciate CM’s efforts as an information scout.
Do I agree with everything presented here. Of course not. And that’s OK. But it is important for me to lower my defenses to be able to consider new information.
The best way for that to occur is through respectful dialogue about the issues that are allowed on this forum.
Are there some realms probably best left alone. Yes…avoiding topics such as politics and religion is healthy because of the low flash points associated with them.
And what can be discussed with respectful dialogue can increase. For example LR’s reference to the seeming nefarious federal reserve going from being to controversial to openly discuss to the man himself who wrote the book (so to speak) on the multinational origins of the our country’s private central bank being a headliner.
I see that as progress and I am grateful for it.
Another important area in prepping for a different world lacking respectful dialogue on this site is growing a resilient community with the ability to respectfully and responsibly provide security for itself. Because in a world of scarcer resources, not everyone is going to play nice.
Just my .02 and I apologize for the rambling on and hope I did not offend anyone.
Southerner